> I have also thought a bit (a very little bit) about the way
> the stencils are implemented. As it is now, when you call
> the applyStencil function there are some dummy-functions called to find
> out the footprint-size of the operator. Wouldn't it be better if this
> was made
> as a separate call? If you for example have a small array and
> call applyStencil in a tight loop there would be quite a lot
> of unneccesary calls to the footprint-size functions.
Yes, this is a sensible thing to do. Also on the todo now.
Thanks,
Todd
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Feb 20 2002 - 04:30:07 EST